Top

Published in:

01-09-2015 | Original Article

Oncological outcomes following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in a multiracial Asian population

Authors: Low Wei Xiang Alvin, Sim Hong Gee, Huang Hong Hong, Cheng Wai Sam Christopher, Ho Sien Sun Henry, Lau Kam On Weber, Tan Puay Hoon, Lee Lui Shiong

Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Issue 3/2015

Abstract

This study evaluates the oncological outcomes of RARP in a multiracial Asian population from a single institution. All suitable patients from 1st January 2003–30th June 2013 were identified from a prospectively maintained cancer registry. Peri-operative and oncological outcomes were analysed. Significance was defined as p < 0.05. There were n = 725 patients identified with a mean follow-up duration 28 months. The mean operative time, EBL and LOS were 186 min, 215 ml and 3 days, respectively. The pathological stage was pT2 in 68.6 % (n = 497/725), pT3 in 31.3 % (n = 227/725) and n = 1 patient with pT4 disease. The pathological Gleason scores (GS) were 6 in 27.9 % (n = 202/725), GS 7 in 63.6 % (n = 461/725) and GS ≥ 8 in 8.0 % (n = 58/725). The node positivity rate was 5.8 % (n = 21/360). The positive margin rates were 31.0 % (n = 154/497) and 70.9 % (n = 161/227) for pT2 and pT3, respectively, and decreasing PSM rates are observed with surgical maturity. The biochemical recurrence rates were 9.7 % (n = 48/497) and 34.2 % (n = 78/228) for pT2 and pT3/T4, respectively. On multivariate analysis, independent predictors of BCR were pathological T stage and pathological Gleason score. Post-operatively, 78.5 % (n = 569/725) of patients had no complications and 17.7 % (n = 128/725) had minor (Clavien grade I–II) complications. This series, representing the largest from Southeast Asia, suggests that RARP can be a safe and oncologically feasible treatment for localised prostate cancer in an institution with moderate workload.

Available only for authorised users

Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M, Joniau S, Matveev VB, Schmid HP et al (2008) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol 53(1):68–80CrossRefPubMed

Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS et al (2007) Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol 177(6):2106–2131CrossRefPubMed

Sim HG, Lim KH, Tay MH, Chong KT, Chiong E (2013) Guidelines on management of prostate cancer. Ann Acad Med Singapore 42(4):190–199PubMed

Williams S, Chiong E, Lojanapiwat B, Umbas R, Akaza H (2013) Management of prostate cancer in Asia: resource-stratified guidelines from the Asian Oncology Summit 2013. Lancet Oncol 14(12):e524–e534CrossRefPubMed

Sundram M (2010) Asian robotic experience. Urol Oncol 28(6):677–681CrossRefPubMed

Sim HG, Yip SK, Lau WK, Tan JK, Cheng CW (2004) Early experience with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Asian J Surg 27(4):321–325CrossRefPubMed

Yip KH, Yee CH, Ng CF, Lam NY, Ho KL, Ma WK et al (2012) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in Hong Kong: a review of 235 cases. J Endourol 26(3):258–263CrossRefPubMed

Kim KH, Lim SK, Shin TY, Chung BH, Hong SJ, Rha KH (2013) Biochemical outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with follow-up more than 5-years. Asian J Androl 15(3):404–408PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Hashimoto T, Yoshioka K, Gondo T, Kamoda N, Satake N, Ozu C et al (2013) Learning curve and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in 200 initial Japanese cases by a single surgeon. J Endourol 27(10):1218–1223CrossRefPubMed

10.

Ou YC, Yang CK, Chang KS, Wang J, Hung SW, Tung MC et al (2014) The surgical learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience of a single surgeon with 500 cases in Taiwan, China. Asian J Androl 16(5):728–734PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

11.

Menon M, Bhandari M, Gupta N, Lane Z, Peabody JO, Rogers CG et al (2010) Biochemical recurrence following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: analysis of 1384 patients with a median 5-year follow-up. Eur Urol 58(6):838–846CrossRefPubMed

12.

Sooriakumaran P, Haendler L, Nyberg T, Gronberg H, Nilsson A, Carlsson S et al (2012) Biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a European single-centre cohort with a minimum follow-up time of 5 years. Eur Urol 62(5):768–774CrossRefPubMed

13.

Suardi N, Ficarra V, Willemsen P, De Wil P, Gallina A, De Naeyer G et al (2012) Long-term biochemical recurrence rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: analysis of a single-center series of patients with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Urology 79(1):133–138CrossRefPubMed

14.

Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, Horton J, Davis TE, McFadden ET et al (1982) Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 5(6):649–655CrossRefPubMed

15.

Edge SB, Compton CC (2010) The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol 17(6):1471–1474CrossRefPubMed

16.

D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Fondurulia J, Chen MH, Tomaszewski JE et al (1998) The combination of preoperative prostate specific antigen and postoperative pathological findings to predict prostate specific antigen outcome in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 160(6 Pt 1):2096–2101CrossRefPubMed

17.

Cookson MS, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, D’Amico AV, Dmochowski RR et al (2007) Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes. J Urol 177(2):540–545CrossRefPubMed

18.

Samaratunga H, Montironi R, True L, Epstein JI, Griffiths DF, Humphrey PA et al (2011) International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling. Mod Pathol 24(1):6–15CrossRefPubMed

19.

Hashimoto T, Yoshioka K, Nagao G, Nakagami Y, Ohno Y, Horiguchi Y, Namiki K, Nakashima J, Tachibana M (2014) Prediction of biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: analysis of 784 Japanese patients. Int J Urol 22(2):188–193. doi:10.1111/iju.12624 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Xylinas E, Durand X, Ploussard G, Campeggi A, Allory Y, Vordos D et al (2013) Evaluation of combined oncologic and functional outcomes after robotic-assisted laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: trifecta rate of achieving continence, potency and cancer control. Urol Oncol 31(1):99–103CrossRefPubMed

21.

Novara G, Ficarra V, D’Elia C, Secco S, Cavalleri S, Artibani W (2011) Trifecta outcomes after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 107(1):100–104CrossRefPubMed

22.

Shikanov SA, Zorn KC, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL (2009) Trifecta outcomes after robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology 74(3):619–623CrossRefPubMed

23.

Jayram G, Decastro GJ, Large MC, Razmaria A, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL et al (2011) Robotic radical prostatectomy in patients with high-risk disease: a review of short-term outcomes from a high-volume center. J Endourol 25(3):455–457CrossRefPubMed

24.

Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav SK, Burgess SV, Thomas R, Davis R (2006) Positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol 49(5):866–71 (discussion 871–2)

25.

Sooriakumaran P, John M, Wiklund P, Lee D, Nilsson A, Tewari AK (2011) Learning curve for robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study of 3794 patients. Minerva Urol Nefrol 63(3):191–198PubMed

26.

Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Costello A, Eastham JA et al (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62(3):431–452CrossRefPubMed

27.

Sooriakumaran P, Srivastava A, Shariat SF, Stricker PD, Ahlering T, Eden CG et al (2014) A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22,393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients. Eur Urol 66(3):450–456CrossRefPubMed

28.

Eastham JA, Kuroiwa K, Ohori M, Serio AM, Gorbonos A, Maru N et al (2007) Prognostic significance of location of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 70(5):965–969CrossRefPubMed

29.

Ochiai A, Sotelo T, Troncoso P, Bhadkamkar V, Babaian RJ (2008) Natural history of biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy based on length of a positive margin. Urology 71(2):308–312CrossRefPubMed

30.

Swindle P, Eastham JA, Ohori M, Kattan MW, Wheeler T, Maru N et al (2008) Do margins matter? The prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 179(5 Suppl):S47–S51CrossRefPubMed

31.

Mauermann J, Fradet V, Lacombe L, Dujardin T, Tiguert R, Tetu B et al (2013) The impact of solitary and multiple positive surgical margins on hard clinical end points in 1712 adjuvant treatment-naive pT2-4 N0 radical prostatectomy patients. Eur Urol 64(1):19–25CrossRefPubMed

32.

Udo K, Cronin AM, Carlino LJ, Savage CJ, Maschino AC, Al-Ahmadie HA et al (2013) Prognostic impact of subclassification of radical prostatectomy positive margins by linear extent and Gleason grade. J Urol 189(4):1302–1307CrossRefPubMed

33.

Kumar R, Nayyar R, Kumar V, Gupta NP, Hemal AK, Jagannathan NR et al (2008) Potential of magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in predicting absence of prostate cancer in men with serum prostate-specific antigen between 4 and 10 ng/ml: a follow-up study. Urology 72(4):859–863CrossRefPubMed

34.

Vilanova JC, Barcelo-Vidal C, Comet J, Boada M, Barcelo J, Ferrer J et al (2011) Usefulness of prebiopsy multifunctional and morphologic MRI combined with free-to-total prostate-specific antigen ratio in the detection of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196(6):W715–W722CrossRefPubMed

35.

Numao N, Yoshida S, Komai Y, Ishii C, Kagawa M, Kijima T et al (2013) Usefulness of pre-biopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and clinical variables to reduce initial prostate biopsy in men with suspected clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 190(2):502–508CrossRefPubMed

36.

Lim GH, Chow KY, Lee HP (2012) Singapore cancer trends in the last decade. Singapore Med J 53(1):3–9 (quiz 10)

37.

Hwii Ko Y, Jae Sung D, Gu Kang S, Ho Kang S, Gu Lee J, Jong Kim J et al (2011) The predictability of T3 disease in staging MRI following prostate biopsy decreases in patients with high initial PSA and Gleason score. Asian J Androl 13(3):487–493PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

38.

Somford DM, Hamoen EH, Futterer JJ, van Basten JP, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Vreuls W et al (2013) The predictive value of endorectal 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for extraprostatic extension in patients with low, intermediate and high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 190(5):1728–1734CrossRefPubMed

39.

Tamada T, Sone T, Jo Y, Yamamoto A, Ito K (2014) Diffusion-weighted MRI and its role in prostate cancer. NMR Biomed 27(1):25–38CrossRefPubMed

40.

Verma S, Turkbey B, Muradyan N, Rajesh A, Cornud F, Haider MA et al (2012) Overview of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis and management. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198(6):1277–1288CrossRefPubMed

41.

Kim CK, Park BK, Kim B (2010) Diffusion-weighted MRI at 3 T for the evaluation of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194(6):1461–1469CrossRefPubMed

42.

Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G et al (2012) ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 22(4):746–757PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Title: Oncological outcomes following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in a multiracial Asian population
Authors: Low Wei Xiang Alvin
Sim Hong Gee
Huang Hong Hong
Cheng Wai Sam Christopher
Ho Sien Sun Henry
Lau Kam On Weber
Tan Puay Hoon
Lee Lui Shiong
Publication date: 01-09-2015
Publisher: Springer London
Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Electronic ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-015-0516-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Oncological outcomes following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in a multiracial Asian population

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

Postoperative rhabdomyolysis following robotic renal and adrenal surgery: a cautionary tale of compounding risk factors

Virtual reality robotic surgery simulation curriculum to teach robotic suturing: a randomized controlled trial

Robot-assisted laparoscopic gastrectomy for Menetrier’s disease

Augmented reality and cone beam CT guidance for transoral robotic surgery

Robotic surgery and hemostatic agents in partial nephrectomy: a high rate of success without vascular clamping

Bilateral simultaneous robot-assisted pyelolithotomy for large (>6 cm) kidney stones: technique and review of literature